Salmon River subdivision requests put aside by Langley Township council

Langley Township councillors chewed over two applications to subdivide properties in the Salmon River Uplands last week.

Township staff recommended against both projects at the Feb. 3 meeting.

One was denied, while another was referred for a second look.

Robert Robinson asked council to allow him to subdivide his property at 24200 63rd Ave.

He plans to continue living on one property while selling the other, allowing him financial freedom to continue staying there in his later years, Robinson said.

â€œIâ€™m heading for my 80th birthday,â€ Robinson said.

Gloria Stelting, however, asked council to not subdivide, as sheâ€™s concerned about the impacts on the Hopington Aquifer.

â€œPlease continue to protect the aquifer,â€ Stelting said.

A long-term neighbour spoke up in favour of the project.

Patrice Weibelzahl said there was a big difference between Robinsonâ€™s subdivision and the nearby major development at Tuscan Farms.

Council ultimately voted eight to one in favour of the staff recommendation against the subdivision.

The second project, a similar division from one lot to two, this time at 23427 50th Ave., came with extensive plans for the use of green technology to recycle water.

Wes Day, whose wife grew up on the property, told the Township council that grey water recovery will reduce the amount of water drawn from the wells that will feed both houses. Rainwater harvesting was also contemplated.

There is also a nearby private water system owned by a group of residents, but it also draws water from the Hopington Aquifer.

Councillor Grant Ward was in favour of granting a variance and allowing a subdivision, while other councillors wanted more information.

â€œI am cautious that this could set a trend,â€ said Coun. Michelle Sparrow.

Coun. Bev Dornan noted that she would like to see an option other than drilling another well.

â€œI think the main thing is to protect the Hopington Aquifer,â€ said Coun. David Davis.

A six to three vote saw the matter referred to a future date, when the council has more information on the options for the project.